maxineshaw
Well-Known Member
I'm just looking for some outside opinions. My mother and I had a debate about the following (true) story:
My mother told me about a man she knows. The man was basically a dog (for lack of a better term). She said he married woman #1. They had two children. While he was married to woman #1, he met woman #2. He left woman #1 for woman #2, allegedly because #2 had money. They had one child. While he and #2 were married, he cheated on her (the man was basically a serial cheater).
Anywhoodle, I guess he was tired of his lifestyle because he gave his life to Christ and became a saved man. Enter, the preacher. The preacher was ministering to him about his cheating, and the man asked him for advice about his philandering and his wife. I'm not sure if he directly asked the preacher (and i like to imagine that he did), but the preacher told him that he should tell his wife the truth. So, he did. Woman #2 decided that she didn't want the man anymore, and they divorced. He is now happily married to wife #3.
BTW, wife #2 was completely unaware of his actions until he confessed. The man genuinely wanted to work things out with his wife, but as I stated she did not want him anymore.
Now, here's the debate:
I said the preacher did give the man the correct advice, and the wife deserved to know the truth. I mean, I would definitely want to know.
My mother says (and I'm rolling my eyes as I type this, but hey, some of you may agree; if you do agree, don't feel disinclined to state just that) that the preacher gave the man incorrect advice. She says that since the wife was completely unaware of the man's actions, the preacher should have told him no. Essentially, telling the wife the truth would unnecessarily compromise his marriage, his finances, and his relationship with his child. In God's eyes, the man was absolved of his sins so nothing else matters.
Now, I would put a little blue eye-rolling emoticon after that last sentence, but what is really being debated is God's law (and that is not something that I would roll my eyes at). I reason that just because God has forgiven the man doesn't make him exempt of the consequences of those sins. I used murder as an example. Let's say a man commits murder. He can repent to God and be forgiven (because there is only one unforgivable sin according to the Word of God). However, he would still be punished. He would still be held responsible for his actions in the eyes of man.
Basically, the man's repentance to God isn't a free pass to act like nothing happened. I think the man recognized that, and that willed him to tell his wife the truth.
As I am typing this, I picture myself being wife #2. I picture us sitting at dinner and me being totally unaware of the person that I am sharing my life with. I picture me looking at him and smiling. And, he smiles back too, only his body is the wool covering the wolf. I wouldn't want that to be me. I'd rather feel the emotional turmoil than live a lie.
Thoughts?
My mother told me about a man she knows. The man was basically a dog (for lack of a better term). She said he married woman #1. They had two children. While he was married to woman #1, he met woman #2. He left woman #1 for woman #2, allegedly because #2 had money. They had one child. While he and #2 were married, he cheated on her (the man was basically a serial cheater).
Anywhoodle, I guess he was tired of his lifestyle because he gave his life to Christ and became a saved man. Enter, the preacher. The preacher was ministering to him about his cheating, and the man asked him for advice about his philandering and his wife. I'm not sure if he directly asked the preacher (and i like to imagine that he did), but the preacher told him that he should tell his wife the truth. So, he did. Woman #2 decided that she didn't want the man anymore, and they divorced. He is now happily married to wife #3.
BTW, wife #2 was completely unaware of his actions until he confessed. The man genuinely wanted to work things out with his wife, but as I stated she did not want him anymore.
Now, here's the debate:
I said the preacher did give the man the correct advice, and the wife deserved to know the truth. I mean, I would definitely want to know.
My mother says (and I'm rolling my eyes as I type this, but hey, some of you may agree; if you do agree, don't feel disinclined to state just that) that the preacher gave the man incorrect advice. She says that since the wife was completely unaware of the man's actions, the preacher should have told him no. Essentially, telling the wife the truth would unnecessarily compromise his marriage, his finances, and his relationship with his child. In God's eyes, the man was absolved of his sins so nothing else matters.
Now, I would put a little blue eye-rolling emoticon after that last sentence, but what is really being debated is God's law (and that is not something that I would roll my eyes at). I reason that just because God has forgiven the man doesn't make him exempt of the consequences of those sins. I used murder as an example. Let's say a man commits murder. He can repent to God and be forgiven (because there is only one unforgivable sin according to the Word of God). However, he would still be punished. He would still be held responsible for his actions in the eyes of man.
Basically, the man's repentance to God isn't a free pass to act like nothing happened. I think the man recognized that, and that willed him to tell his wife the truth.
As I am typing this, I picture myself being wife #2. I picture us sitting at dinner and me being totally unaware of the person that I am sharing my life with. I picture me looking at him and smiling. And, he smiles back too, only his body is the wool covering the wolf. I wouldn't want that to be me. I'd rather feel the emotional turmoil than live a lie.
Thoughts?
